11.2 The Data

In a bit we’ll explore these correlations in more depth,
simultaneously examining a few more theories, but first a brief digression back
to the topic of this Notebook, the Experiment. Because of the importance of the
Data to the conclusions, let us relate a brief history of the data accumulation
categories, the 20 Data Streams that make up our Experiment.

A. Brief History of the Data Streams

In brief the impetus to perform the Experiment was based
upon the desire of our Experimenter to understand the influence of different
behaviors upon each other. In order to do this our Experimenter had to arrange
for the participation of a Subject, the accumulation of Data concerning this
Subject by an Observer, the generation of Correlations, and then the Analysis
the Results by a Scientist and then the Production of a Paper by a Writer to
formalize the whole process. In the pursuit of this end our Experimenter
discovered much concerning the dynamics of behavior.

Subject, Observer, Scientist, and Writer

Not being of great education or means, working as a mere
waiter, his resources were limited. Therefore he took a human being, himself,
as the subject of the Experiment. We will call him the Subject. (For ease of
reference we will create many general terms of this nature. These terms will be
capitalized. This indicates that they have relatively precise meaning, based
upon definition rather than intuition.) He then hired an Observer, again
himself, to observe and record the amount of time that our Subject performed
each type of activity on a daily basis. Our Experimenter set this process in
motion and then checked back in again every five to ten years to check on the
progress of his Experiment. He arranged for a Scientist to analyze the results
and a Writer to write them up. This paper that you, the Reader, are presently
reading, is the collaboration of the Scientist and a Writer, again himself, to
communicate the results of this Experiment to the general Public. Experimenter,
Subject, Observer, Scientist, Writer - all different parts of the same Person,
emerging, as we shall see, from unique parts of the same Mind.

Early Mood Experiment Abandoned

The Experimenter, not really knowing what to expect, told
the Observer to watch the Subject carefully and to record anything that he did
that was of interest. The Observer began watching the Subject when he had just
turned 20. The first Data that was generated by our Observer had to do with
emotions and moods. The Observer rated each hour of the day emotionally on a
scale of 0 to 10. The Data was so turbulent and confusing that the Scientist
couldn’t find anything to correlate or analyze. Although the Experimenter gained
insights into the Subject, there was nothing to quantify, correlate, analyze,
and write up. Eventually after less than a year this form of Data collection
was abandoned.

A few years later, inspired by an intense infusion of
Undergraduate Statistics, Physics and Math, our Experimenter directed his
Observer to record a different type of Data. While the earlier data had been
qualitative, i.e. good and bad emotions, this data was to be purely
quantitative. What did our Subject spend his time doing? More specifically, how
did the Subject spend the 24 hours that he was allotted each day?

1975: Work/Waiting: Action #1

The Observer began by recording everything that seemed
significant that the Subject did. The Data accumulation began in July 1975 with
how much time he spent Working, in his case waiting tables.

(The real reason for this initial obsessive record keeping
had nothing to do with Action Studies. The desire to accumulate this first Data
Stream was based primarily upon a desire to know how much our Person, the
accumulation of contradictory selves associated with our Body, was making per
hour as a Waiter. As a waiter he was not paid an hourly wage. Instead he made
most of his money in tips. Our Subject wanted to know how much he was making
per hour in terms of job comparison. How could an intelligent choice be made
without thorough information?

Ironically we still thought we were our Person at this time.
We thought we were in charge. We wanted control. We hadn’t reached a state of
trust. Much of this initial obsessive record keeping had more to do with a
desire to be in control and less to do with experimental curiosity.)

1976: Exercise: Actions #1 & 2

Less than a year later, Exercise was added as an activity, a
recordable Action. This was natural as Our Person was an avid beach Volleyball
player at this time.

(Again the real reason that this Data Stream began had
nothing to do with Correlations or Action Studies. It had primarily to do with
knowing how well he did in sports. He wanted everyone know that he was good in
sports by showing that he won a lot of games. He didn’t want to be thought of
as only an intellect. Thru these ‘Books’ he was trying to hold on to his
warrior side. He was still so young - Thinking that this really mattered.

He also thought that by keeping track that he could tell
when he was getting ‘better’. Another of his misconceptions. Playing the game
was all that mattered - The Idea of ‘getting better’ is a mental hang-up, which
will certainly interfere with ‘getting better’.)

1976: Paint, Music, Divination, & Science: Actions #3 -> 6

Just after our Subject turned 26 in 1976, having just
finished College for the second time, our Person, a frustrated scholar,
sublimated his creative energy in many directions. Each of these Actions became
recordable in its own time. Very soon after completing all his scientific
deductive left-brain classes, he let his intuitive creative right brain go
wild, painting pictures, playing music, doing astrology charts, and even doing
a little science as time permitted. As the circumstances dictated, Painting,
Science, Music, and Divination were all added to the Data accumulation.

1976: Help, Reading, School, Sex & Books: Actions 7 -> 11

Getting credit for these categories led our Subject to want
to get credit for Helping out, Reading, School and Sex. These Action categories
were added next. Further with all this Data Accumulation with Actions and also
Finances, the Observer also began recording how much time the Subject spent on
Records or Books, as the category was to be called later.

(This shows how out of control this obsessive anal-retentive
record keeping was getting - An entire category to illustrate what a
control-freak our Person was. To be fair the Category was partly created in
order to get the ‘books’ under control. He sensed he was becoming a data-oholic
and wanted to rein himself in by just paying attention. This was fairly mature
on his part -

Don’t do anything - Just Pay attention - And the sunlight
dries up the mold - The light illuminates the darkness.)

Feeling of ‘getting credit’ skews Data

Because of our Subject’s feeling that he was ‘getting
credit’ for the above Actions, he pressured the Observer into giving him higher
Data readings for these ‘productive’ activities. Note that the feeling of ‘getting
credit’ was a purely internal reward, a completely mental construct. There was
not a shred of external reward. However the Data for the ‘productive’ actions
was probably skewed upward while the Data for ‘unproductive’ Actions was
probably skewed downward so that our Person could feel good for getting more
credit.

1978: Meditation and Sleep: Actions #12 & 13

Our Subject took a Meditation class in early 1978 and added
this as an Action category. Having these Actions under control statistically it
was no effort to add Sleep as a recordable Action in mid 1978.

Distortion of Sleep Data, minimizes results

In line with what we were saying above about skewed results
- if anything there would have been a tendency on the part of the Observer to
underestimate Sleep Time, because he wanted to reward the Subject for getting
less Sleep and he didn’t want to discourage him for not living up to the
expectations of the Experimenter. Trying to please may have distorted the Data,
but this would have had no effect upon the results, which were exactly opposite
of what was expected, as previously mentioned.

1978: Writing: Action #14

At the end of 1978 our Person wrote a novel and Writing was
added as a category.

1981: Consulting, Viewing, Talking, and Baby Time: Actions #15 -> 18

A few years later in 1981 our Subject was offered a
secondary job as Controller of the restaurant he worked in. This started the
Consult/Management category. With this infusion of intellectual energy he also
added in Viewing, and Talking. Soon after his first child was born and Baby was
added as a recordable Action.

1989: Jewelry: Action #19

Our Subject’s wife started a career as Jeweler in 1979.
Initially this did not involve our Subject much and he included the time spent
in different categories, Books or Helping out. During the mid ‘80s our Subject
spent an increasing amount of time on his wife’s Jewelry business. She was
accepted at the prestigious Renaissance Faire in 1986 and he had to spend 6
weekends a year ‘Helping out’. In addition to helping set up her jewelry
display, he spent a great deal of time analyzing his wife’s Jewelry business as
a business manager, ‘Books’. By this time he had a personal computer and so
much of the Jewelry time went into the box of Computer Time, which had merged with
Science. In 1989 he finally started a Jewelry category. This completed the
Action categories.

(This is why our Modern Data Sets begin in 1989. From this
point all the Data Streams are accumulated separately. Before this point many
streams merged and separated.)

1994: First Study 1989-1992 & the Void: Action #20

In April 1994, 18 years after the beginning of Data
accumulation, our Scientist was called in to do some Correlations and analyze
the Results. Afraid of the purity of earlier Data he confined his study to the
4 years of 1989 -> 1992. He based all his correlations upon the complete
24-hour day. Because all of the Action categories didn’t add up to 24 he
created another category, the Emptiness or the Void, which was the time that
was unaccounted for in a 24-hour period. This was the 20th category - a
non-Action category to balance all the Action categories. He came up with some
amazing results based upon correlations between these 20 categories, which are
partly written up.

B. Fuzzy Data has validity despite major flaws

1994 & 2002: Data Purification

Our Scientist was disturbed by a few of the Action
Categories, which included parts of other Actions. He was afraid that this
mixture would distort his results. Aware of the tenuous nature of his Data, he
wanted to insure that it was as accurate as possible, within the parameters
that had been set up. An initial data purification was done in 1994. This was
completed in 2002. This mainly had to do with separating the Actions of
Jewelry, Books, Writing, Computer, Helping out and Consulting from each other.
While it was done as best as could be done, much of the purification was based
upon guesstimation of Data Accumulation that was up to 20 years old. This is
another way that the Data is flawed.

Experimental Data Fuzzy at best

The point is that the Data accumulated by our Observer over
many years is quite fuzzy. (See Fuzzy Data Notebook for the supporting theory.)
Categories have emerged and merged and broken into parts. More importantly in
terms of fuzziness, the notions of the Action categories have changed subtly
and imperceptibly since the Observer began his task. What might have been Books
at one time might be Science at another time. These flaws, however, are nothing
compared with the fact that our Observer would many write down time
guesstimations of Action Time up to 3 weeks after the event. As if these
factors aren’t enough of a problem, the Observer is the Subject, which gives
his Data collecting abilities a decidedly biased nature. Most experiments require
a certain amount of objectivity to be considered reliable. This whole
Experiment is based upon entirely subjective Data Readings on only one Subject,
accumulated irregularly, based around guesstimations, with shifting categories
over more than 20 years.

Experimental results so bold, that they warrant study

On first thought one might find the Data fatally flawed and
unworthy of consideration. Our Scientist said as much and threatened to walk
out on the job. However the Experimenter insisted on proceeding forth. The
results are bold. Some of the results have been suggested and more are included
on the following pages. While our Data is on shaky foundations it reveals so
much about the working of the Mind that the analysis could be said to be a
glimpse at some underlying truths about dynamical behavior that could be
explored under more controlled conditions by more competent Experimenters.

On the positive side of the Data: no preconceptions

On the bright side of the Data Accumulation: Because the
Experiment was run over 20 years and because the Scientist was only called in
briefly to analyze the Data and propose some theories, the Data Collection was
not tainted by projected Scientific theory. Indeed the Scientist, after
analyzing the Data in 1994 proposed many theories. Once these formulas were
finalized the Scientist began pressuring the Observer to take the Data readings
with his theories in mind. Luckily the Observer had some integrity and told the
Scientist to get lost and go to sleep for a few more years. Thus our Scientist
went into hibernation until 2002 allowing the Observer to collect his Data
independently of pre-conceptions. Thus the Data collection while flawed in many
ways is not flawed by scientific preconceptions. There were no theories formulated
until 1994, after 18 years of Data collection. Then these theories were put to
sleep, i.e. forgotten until 2002, until some new theories were formulated. Thus
the Observer collecting the Data and the Scientist proposing theories after
correlating and analyzing the Data were almost entirely separated.

Theories and relations so complex - impossible to fudge Data

The second bright side of our Data is that the theories
proposed by our scientist were more complex than the Observer ever imagined.
There is no way he could have fudged the Data to fit the observed patterns
because he didn’t know what the patterns were. Further even after discovering
the patterns, the Observer had no idea how to create this type of pattern no
matter how much he was bribed by the Scientist. It was like the king demanding
the girl to spin straw into gold because he had heard she could. The Observer
heard from the Scientist about the correlations but had no way of duplicating
the findings.

Easy to fudge Data from simple theories of cause and effect

When there are only a few variables and one is seeking
causal relations between them, it is easy to fudge the Data to fit
preconceptions. Simply augment the readings that are supposed to causally
connected and diminish those that are not supposed to be connected. In this
case the conclusions of the Scientist were so much more complex than the
Observer had ever imagined, the Observer couldn’t shape his Data collection to
the scientific theory. Too many variables over too much time.

Observer’s bias not related with results

One thing more about our Observer: he is in no way a
Scientist. He and the Subject conspired to slightly exaggerate the
achievements, but this had nothing to do with correlations. Indeed the main
motivation of the Observer and Subject was to graph his Activities because they
looked pretty and gave our Person a sense of achievement. This connection of
Observer and Subject had nothing to do with confirming or disconfirming
scientific theory. Indeed the Subject would forget for years that he even had
scientific side. For over a decade he thought his Scientific side had been lost
in the waves of time. Our Subject became so lost in his Painting or Writing,
fiction and histories that he wondered how he could ever done anything scientific.
We will understand the mechanism behind this a little better when we begin
examining the Data.

Main motivation behind Data was Graphs, only

Indeed the impetus behind the Data Collection for years was
merely the desire to see what the Subject had accomplished visually over time
in graph form. The Subject would go into a Painting or Writing frenzy. He would
wake up from his trance a few months later, burned out from his Creative
frenzy. The Subject emerging from personal hibernation having woken up from
Divine Possession wanted to see a visual picture of his transformation. The
Observer would call up a Graph of the time spent on his Creative side based
upon his Data. These graphs had no underlying correlations or analysis. They
were merely line or bar graphs of how much time our Subject spent monthly upon
his creative obsession.

C. Uncalled for Scientific Explosions

Unexpected Scientific Explosion of 1993-4

The Scientific explosion of 1993 and 1994 was uncalled for
and unexpected. The conclusions were far different and more complex than ever
expected. Going into the analysis our Scientist was merely attempting to
discover some significant correlations between specific Actions. He had no idea
that the Actions organized themselves as complexes of activities, each unique
unto itself. Our Scientist’s choice of the four years of activities to analyze
was based upon his perception that the rest of the data was hopelessly
corrupted and unworthy of analysis.

Scientific Explosion of 2002, equally surprising

The Scientific explosion of 2002 was also uncalled for and
unexpected. Due to advances in technology our Scientist was able to extend his
previous analysis. Because of a more powerful computer - able to handle more
computations more quickly, our Scientist decided to extend the correlations
back to the beginning of the Data Collection. He just ran a test run for kicks,
assuming that the Data Collection was way to fuzzy to generate any clear cut
conclusions. He was shocked and surprised to discover some clear-cut
correlations. Indeed he just ran the correlations as a lark, just for fun.

Subject thought he was Writer at the time

Our Subject felt that he was in the midst of finishing off a
third draft of his novel, when he was stunned by these ‘miraculous correlations’
as he called them. He had written off his scientific side as hopeless,
‘jousting with windmills thinking they were dragons’; ‘spinning his wheels in
futile activity’; ‘fluttering his fingers before his eyes as the autistic
children do’. Our Subject resisted his Scientific urges as unrealistic
dreaming. But then these incredibly unexpected correlations were dropped in his
lap.

First urge to run away

His first urge was to run far away. “Oh No! Why me? I’m done
with my scientific side. I’m over that. Done and gone.”

“Realistically I am a Writer, not a Scientist,” his
Deductive Left Brain piped in, thinking unrealistically that he was the
Subject. Having created a conception of his Person, he began to identify with
it and attempt to control it.

The Mind Brain continued his babble: “My therapist told me
to stay away from this delusional side. It will only get me in trouble. He said
that my father’s alcoholism was passed down to me as out-of-control creative
obsessions, which unbalance my life. I need to be realistic.”

Luckily for us Right Brain in control

Luckily for us, especially right now, or we wouldn’t even
exist, our Subject’s Right Brain was in control. “Well maybe just a little
taste of chocolate. Just one. I’ll just do a few days of research and then back
to my novel.”

Intuitive Right Brain. “Yes!!” “I’ve got him hooked now.
Once he’s taken the first sip it’s all over. He’s a create-oholic you know. He
can’t just take one drink. He’ll go on a binge, waking up months later,
wondering what happened while he was away.”

The Left Brain put up some weak objections: “But what about
your novel which will help so many people to dispel personal delusions.”

Emerging from the Void as One

Right Brain/Little Voice: “I appreciate your input, but in
emerging from the Void, this is all our Person can do right now. For whatever
reason, he can’t even comprehend writing anything else. His Scientific Brain is
switched on. It will take a while before it burns itself out and shuts down of
its own accord. Go with it Mind. Try to help out. You are an essential part of
the Quest. We can’t do it without you. But don’t waste your valuable energy
trying to frighten us about scary futures - about what we should do or
shouldn’t. We are doing what emerges from quietude. Nothing else. What else
could we do that would engage the whole Being? Any other action would be
fragmentary with everyone moving inefficiently in random directions. Stand
behind me, the Little Voice, and we will be irresistible, moving as one.”

Anyway here we are - stumbling thru this quagmire of
illusary correlations of cause and effect.

(If these causal correlations are so illusory, why are we
studying them?)